I wonder where this might lead...

[brakelite]

If it is literal, how was there an evening and a morning before there was the greater light?

Wasn't it you that said earlier that the stars, sun, moon etc were established as signs and indicators for times and seasons? Are they not therefore markers, rather than arbitrary controllers? According to Genesis, the evening and morning were the first day, but without the sun or moon to mark it, Doesn't mean though the day's existence was dependent upon the sun. Later, the sunrise and sunset was used as a marker for the Sabbath, but what of those who live in places where the sun is above the horizon for 6 months? Surely their calendars don't stop just because the sun is visible, or the days don't progress from on day to the next just because the sun is up semi permanently 6 months of the year?

I also must ask if Christians should also observe the Sabbath?

Well, that depends on whose authority you choose to acknowledge. You won't find support for not observing the Sabbath in scripture. So if you choose another day...or no day at all...or something else, then that idea if you choose to obey it, must come from an authority that is extra-biblical. Which is of course your choice.

 

[Giuliano]

The main problem with the serpent (i.e. devil) is that he is a LIAR. He lied to Eve by twisting God's words and casting doubt on what God had said. "Did God say...?" Then he went on to say what God had NOT said, but he made it sound like what God had said. This is deception, and the devil is a master of deception.

Clearly both the serpent and Satan can be said to be deceptive; but that by itself doesn't convince me to insert "Satan" into Genesis.

Now, I agree with you that Adam, who was standing right there (according to KJV), should have done something to prevent his wife from disobeying God. We're not told why he didn't. Maybe he couldn't for some reason. We're just not told.

I do not know that Adam was standing right there.

But there is one thing that you need to keep in mind. At this point, Adam had not been given authority to rule over his wife. This was part of the curse spoken against Eve--that her husband would rule over her.

He "named" her.

I also think you may be missing the "desire" part. Eve would want Adam sometimes when he didn't want her.

, please excuse my bluntness, but you seem to be very interested in Adam's authority over his wife, but when it comes to God's authority over you, you're not so interested. God would NOT have you seek knowledge through the occult, but you don't seem to have a problem with it. You say that you haven't used your "Christian" tarot cards lately, but then you imply that they are okay.... I urge you to you burn them, and ask God to forgive you for using evil methods to know things about people.

I find your accusation without any foundation when you say I'm not interested in God's authority. I did not say using Tarot cards was okay. And they don't frighten me. You appear frightened of many things.

We are not told anywhere in the Bible that Jacob's thigh was healed. To say this is adding to God's word.

That is from the "oracles" of the Jews, the Oral Torah.

Don't get me wrong; I believe that God heals today. Did you get all that info about Jacob and Rachel from the Zohar?

The verse in Genesis reads "for". If your Bible doesn't read "for," it's a faulty translation.

You said that you have read some of it. This is NOT God's word. This is Jewish mystical "understanding," not what God has said.

I have never used the word Zohar at this forum. Your mind is inventing things that simply aren't true. Your imagination is running wild. I think I read bits of it and it didn't interest me that much. Besides, it was written rather late. It is not the "oracles" or "Oral Torah" that I know about.

I've never heard of people "divining" the future based on Revelation. This is another stretch. I know that Christians teachers give their interpretations of the prophecies in Revelation, but this is not using occult methods to tell the future. I agree that teachers need to be very careful when interpreting God's word, period.

It's trying to figure out the future -- and judging by the many false predictions, I conclude the people making the prediction based on Revelation were false prophets, getting their ideas from the Dark Side. Most seem to use fear too to get supporters -- and God has not given us a spirit of fear.

So, you're concerned about false prophets, but not so much about the occult? This just doesn't make sense to me.

It won't make sense as long as you imagine things that aren't true. You seem to want to demonize me for past.

It's not adding to God's word to believe and say that the devil tempted Eve in the Garden.

If it doesn't say the devil, I won't say the devil. To me, words in Scripture matter. I am not free to substitute words.

It's a stretch to believe that it wasn't the devil. A whole theology has to be built in order to believe that the creature in the Garden called the serpent was not at least being used by the devil to deceive Eve--that the words he spoke were not the devil's words.

I've no doubt the serpent embodied something malevolent and demonic; but I still would not say it was "the devil" himself.

I agree that we need to be careful about preconceived ideas, and yet, what's important is where these ideas come from. Do they come from Bible scholars who use the Bible to interpret the Bible, or use factual historical information.... Or do these ideas come from mystical/occult sources interpreting Bible passages, like the Zohar?

Have you read the Zohar? To be honest, I couldn't understand much of it.

It's interesting that Eve was tempted to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. She was tempted to gain knowledge that was not given to her by God. It was not given to man to know these things. Why did she desire to know about evil, anyway? This is what I see as the main objective of the occult--to know things that God has not shown to humans using methods that He has not given them to use. It's the devil's way, not God's.

I can tell you why the serpent was in the Garden. Adam and Eve were supposed to become as wise as the serpent -- but remain as gentle as the dove. How can we avoid evil if we don't understand it?

It is debatable then if they were to eat of that tree later. After all, they were told they could eat of every tree -- and then told not to eat of that one.

Having said that, God does give Christians methods to know things about people using the spiritual gifts that He has given to believers. I mentioned the gift of the word of knowledge earlier. This can also be true with the gift of prophecy. Do you see the difference? Occult methods seek this knowledge apart from God. The gifts of the Spirit are used in accordance with the power of the Holy Spirit and in line with God's will. Occult methods utilize evil spirits to reveal things.

I see the difference very clearly. I have also never asked God to give me this gift or that very much (sorry, Paul). I will leave that up to God to decide. That's all I want. But there are some who want this gift or that when it is not God's Will for them to have it. If they persist in demanding it, they are in jeopardy of getting a counterfeit spirit who offers them the counterfeit spirit. Simon Magus comes to mind.

You said something about men not receiving prophecies anymore. I knew as a baby Christian that God gave me the gift of prophecy. I didn't seek this gift even though in 1 Cor. 14:1, Paul tells the Church to earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, esp. that we may prophesy. I think that there is a lot of misunderstanding concerning this gift, but when the Holy Spirit moves on me to prophesy, many times, this has involved the Holy Spirit showing me things about people that I didn't know.

My complaint lies mostly with having men without any gifts running churches. Some know almost nothing but merely parrot what others have said.

Here's an example. One time a Christian neighbor and a friend of hers accompanied my husband and me to church. During the worship time, the Holy Spirit gave me a message for my neighbor's friend, who was a Christian. The Spirit showed me to tell her that she was to avoid the very appearance of evil in her relationship with her boyfriend, or her ministry would be hampered. I didn't know that this was a problem for her, but I delivered the message and didn't think much more about it. That afternoon, my neighbor called me and wanted to know "what in the world" I had said to her friend. I relayed the message, and she told me that her friend had been traveling with her boyfriend and sharing a hotel room. This confirmed what the Holy Spirit had given me to say.

It makes perfect sense to me. One has to look at results. It sounds as if your message had good results -- so I would attribute it to God. The occult often leads people to disaster -- as can "false spirits" when found in churches. We must always judge by the fruits, I think. It is too easy for people to believe they're hearing from God when they aren't. The best test is to look at results.

I'm really going out on a limb here. I know that there are Christians on CF who believe that these spiritual gifts ceased with the apostles, and I'm not intending to derail this thread into a cessationist thread. I'm only pointing out the difference between gaining knowledge through gifts of the Holy Spirit vs. occult methods. Actually, I wasn't seeking knowledge about my neighbor's friend. The Holy Spirit moved on me and gave me this knowledge in order to warn this Christian sister that her ministry would be hampered.

Sorry this is so long. I hope that you'll read it all as I've been reading your posts.

You surely know then what I complain about when I talk about men without gifts running things. The cessationists don't believe because they don't have such gifts; and odds are they'll not have them since their disbelief is so strong. That becomes their tradition then, "having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof."

 

[Giuliano]

Wasn't it you that said earlier that the stars, sun, moon etc were established as signs and indicators for times and seasons? Are they not therefore markers, rather than arbitrary controllers? According to Genesis, the evening and morning were the first day, but without the sun or moon to mark it, Doesn't mean though the day's existence was dependent upon the sun. Later, the sunrise and sunset was used as a marker for the Sabbath, but what of those who live in places where the sun is above the horizon for 6 months? Surely their calendars don't stop just because the sun is visible, or the days don't progress from on day to the next just because the sun is up semi permanently 6 months of the year?

I think you're dodging a bit.

I'd say the physical sun, moon and stars were there before Genesis 1:2. What was missing was what might be called the "seven spirits" that correspond to the physical bodies. Each has its own cycles with the spiritual activity matching the movement of the physical bodies. That spiritual hierarchy had been corrupted. The two most corrupted, in my opinion, are the fallen spirits that correspond to the physical moon and Mars. Thus Eden involved putting those seven spirits in place to exercise benevolent influences in their cycles. However, there are still fallen forces at work that follow the same cycles. For example, there is something I still do check out with astrology from time to time -- but not to predict. When Mercury is retrograde, many people's minds get fuzzy and confused. Forms of communication often break down. So when I see these things, I wonder if Mercury is retrograde and look it up. Often it is.

Well, that depends on whose authority you choose to acknowledge. You won't find support for not observing the Sabbath in scripture. So if you choose another day...or no day at all...or something else, then that idea if you choose to obey it, must come from an authority that is extra-biblical. Which is of course your choice.

I see the Sabbath as given only to Israel. They needed it. They could benefit from it then. In theory, today Gentiles are able to enter the eternal rest without pausing on Saturdays to examine their lives and to enjoy life. In practice, few do. It might be useful for them to observe the Sabbath. However, it would not benefit those who were not ready to enter the eternal rest.

I see Genesis 1 also as prophecy. For me, there were seven thousand years allotted for the earth itself to enter the eternal rest. There would be six thousands years first, followed by the Sabbath called the Thousand Year Reign. Calculating dates seemed impossible to me; but I figure the " the fourth day started sometime around 70 AD. "Work for the night is coming." The evening of the "fifth day" was about to begin. So it doesn't seem like a mystery to me when Jesus and the Apostles talked about the "end of the age." Of course it ended. Note too that Jesus as "light" happened on the "fourth day." The patterns in heaven were changed.

 

[brakelite]

I'd say the physical sun, moon and stars were there before Genesis 1:2. What was missing was what might be called the "seven spirits" that correspond to the physical bodies. Each has its own cycles with the spiritual activity matching the movement of the physical bodies. That spiritual hierarchy had been corrupted. The two most corrupted, in my opinion, are the fallen spirits that correspond to the physical moon and Mars. Thus Eden involved putting those seven spirits in place to exercise benevolent influences in their cycles. However, there are still fallen forces at work that follow the same cycles. For example, there is something I still do check out with astrology from time to time -- but not to predict. When Mercury is retrograde, many people's minds get fuzzy and confused. Forms of communication often break down. So when I see these things, I wonder if Mercury is retrograde and look it up. Often it is.

Sorry, but this is just too spooky for me and sounds occult. Nuh.

I see Genesis 1 also as prophecy. For me, there were seven thousand years allotted for the earth itself to enter the eternal rest. There would be six thousands years first, followed by the Sabbath called the Thousand Year Reign. Calculating dates seemed impossible to me; but I figure the " the fourth day started sometime around 70 AD. "Work for the night is coming." The evening of the "fifth day" was about to begin. So it doesn't seem like a mystery to me when Jesus and the Apostles talked about the "end of the age." Of course it ended. Note too that Jesus as "light" happened on the "fourth day." The patterns in heaven were changed.

This however is something I have seen for a long time...thousand years as a day etc. And also confirms the Sabbath. The earth will finally be at rest after 6000 years of neglect and abuse...at rest in preparation for the creation of the new heavens and new earth.

I see the Sabbath as given only to Israel.

And yet the Sabbath was established a couple of 1000 years before Israel existed. Made for man...not Israel.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

I do not know that Adam was standing right there.

And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

I take the underlined words to mean that Adam was with her when she ate the fruit.

He "named" her.

I also think you may be missing the "desire" part. Eve would want Adam sometimes when he didn't want her.

Naming Eve didn't give Adam the authority "to rule over her." In fact, God gave both Adam and Eve dominion over the earth.

I've never completely understood the "desire" part, but this does sound like marriage. From what I've seen, it works both ways, though.

You are tempting me to be equally blunt. I suggest when you begin to write, "please excuse my bluntness," don't write anything. I find your accusation wild and without any foundation when you say I'm not interested in God's authority. I did not say using Tarot cards was okay. And they don't frighten me. You appear frightened of many things.

I can take bluntness as long as it's not cruel. I believe that you've implied that using tarot cards is okay. (I'd have to track back.) I've never heard you say that using tarot cards is evil.... Why do you assume that they scare me?? They don't scare me because I know that greater is He who is in me than he who is in the world!

That is from the "oracles" of the Jews, the Oral Torah.

The "oral" Torah? Much of the Torah was oral until it was written. Are you referring to the first 5 books of the Bible, or what?

I have never used the word Zohar at this forum. Your mind is inventing things that simply aren't true. Your imagination is running wild. I think I read bits of it and it didn't interest me that much. Besides, it was written rather late. It is not the "oracles" or "Oral Torah" that I know about.

I read portions of the Zohar in my research on mysticism. I also read many unbiblical things the so-called "Christian mystics" said.... And I compared all that I read to God's written word.

I asked you if you had gotten that info from the Zohar because it sounds like things the Zohar says. But you never answered my question about where you got the info. I would really like to know.

I can tell you why the serpent was in the Garden. Adam and Eve were supposed to become as wise as the serpent -- but remain as gentle as the dove. How can we avoid evil if we don't understand it?

It is debatable then if they were to eat of that tree later. After all, they were told they could eat of every tree -- and then told not to eat of that one.

Show me in the Bible where God says that Adam and Eve were to "become as wise as a serpent"? In the Garden, they didn't need this kind of wisdom. They didn't need to avoid evil. God had told them all that they needed to know in order to do everything He created them to do.

It is "debatable" if they were to eat of the tree later??? Really? You're twisting (LOL, auto correct changing this to "tweeting") God's words just like the devil did! And I believe that this all goes back to the desire for "hidden" knowledge--occult knowledge.

Nowhere in the Bible do we see your idea expressed--that Adam and Eve were to eat of the Tree at a later time! They wouldn't need the knowledge of good and evil unless they disobeyed God and ate of the Tree..., thus bringing evil into the world. Do you see what I'm saying?

If it doesn't say the devil, I won't say the devil. To me, words in Scripture matter. I am not free to substitute words.

I'm not trying to demonize you. This is what doesn't make any sense to me at all. You're not willing to accept that the devil was acting through the serpent because the Bible doesn't say "the devil" tempted Eve. However, you've repeatedly ascribed ideas to the Bible that are not expressly stated in the Bible. I would say that you've expounded on His word quite a bit.

You surely know then what I complain about when I talk about men without gifts running things. The cessationists don't believe because they don't have such gifts; and odds are they'll not have them since their disbelief is so strong. That becomes their tradition then, "having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof."

I agree with what you're saying here, and it's very sad to me. God gave these spiritual gifts for ministry, and I've seen how valuable they are when used properly. I've also seen the devil's counterfeits used, but like I said before, we shouldn't throw out the baby with the bath water.

BTW, did you read the verses from Ezekiel I posted?
.

 

[bbyrd009]

What about flying serpents?

um, imo that is a euphemism for a person wise in the world, with wings so to speak? Associated with owls, etc?
Isaiah 14:29 Lexicon: "Do not rejoice, O Philistia, all of you, Because the rod that struck you is broken; For from the serpent's root a viper will come out, And its fruit will be a flying serpent.

The word "oracles" means something "oral."

hmm, dunno if that is a very compleat definition for that term wadr

I still have the Tarot cards and haven't looked at them in years.

used to divine the future, right

 

[bbyrd009]

I take the underlined words to mean that Adam was with her when she ate the fruit.

but she noentheless had to "bring some" to Adam, huh. I suggest that when we understand that A&E are me, the reading changes fwiw. I am analytical, and also emotional; and "women" should not speak in Church

Adam the authority "to rule over her."

I've never completely understood the "desire" part

one's emotions can easily take over and become in control of one's actions, perhaps

Nowhere in the Bible do we see your idea expressed--that Adam and Eve were to eat of the Tree at a later time!

i agree, but i also agree that it was inevitable, once consciousness, Adam and Eve iow imo, manifested

 

[Nancy]

The main problem with the serpent (i.e. devil) is that he is a LIAR. He lied to Eve by twisting God's words and casting doubt on what God had said. "Did God say...?" Then he went on to say what God had NOT said, but he made it sound like what God had said. This is deception, and the devil is a master of deception.

Now, I agree with you that Adam, who was standing right there (according to KJV), should have done something to prevent his wife from disobeying God. We're not told why he didn't. Maybe he couldn't for some reason. We're just not told. But there is one thing that you need to keep in mind. At this point, Adam had not been given authority to rule over his wife. This was part of the curse spoken against Eve--that her husband would rule over her.

Again, please excuse my bluntness, but you seem to be very interested in Adam's authority over his wife, but when it comes to God's authority over you, you're not so interested. God would NOT have you seek knowledge through the occult, but you don't seem to have a problem with it. You say that you haven't used your "Christian" tarot cards lately, but then you imply that they are okay.... I urge you to you burn them, and ask God to forgive you for using evil methods to know things about people.

We are not told anywhere in the Bible that Jacob's thigh was healed. To say this is adding to God's word. Don't get me wrong; I believe that God heals today. Did you get all that info about Jacob and Rachel from the Zohar? You said that you have read some of it. This is NOT God's word. This is Jewish mystical "understanding," not what God has said.



I've never heard of people "divining" the future based on Revelation. This is another stretch. I know that Christians teachers give their interpretations of the prophecies in Revelation, but this is not using occult methods to tell the future. I agree that teachers need to be very careful when interpreting God's word, period.

So, you're concerned about false prophets, but not so much about the occult? This just doesn't make sense to me.



It's not adding to God's word to believe and say that the devil tempted Eve in the Garden. It's a stretch to believe that it wasn't the devil. A whole theology has to be built in order to believe that the creature in the Garden called the serpent was not at least being used by the devil to deceive Eve--that the words he spoke were not the devil's words.



I agree that we need to be careful about preconceived ideas, and yet, what's important is where these ideas come from. Do they come from Bible scholars who use the Bible to interpret the Bible, or use factual historical information.... Or do these ideas come from mystical/occult sources interpreting Bible passages, like the Zohar?

It's interesting that Eve was tempted to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. She was tempted to gain knowledge that was not given to her by God. It was not given to man to know these things. Why did she desire to know about evil, anyway? This is what I see as the main objective of the occult--to know things that God has not shown to humans using methods that He has not given them to use. It's the devil's way, not God's.

Having said that, God does give Christians methods to know things about people using the spiritual gifts that He has given to believers. I mentioned the gift of the word of knowledge earlier. This can also be true with the gift of prophecy. Do you see the difference? Occult methods seek this knowledge apart from God. The gifts of the Spirit are used in accordance with the power of the Holy Spirit and in line with God's will. Occult methods utilize evil spirits to reveal things.

You said something about men not receiving prophecies anymore. I knew as a baby Christian that God gave me the gift of prophecy. I didn't seek this gift even though in 1 Cor. 14:1, Paul tells the Church to earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, esp. that we may prophesy. I think that there is a lot of misunderstanding concerning this gift, but when the Holy Spirit moves on me to prophesy, many times, this has involved the Holy Spirit showing me things about people that I didn't know.

Here's an example. One time a Christian neighbor and a friend of hers accompanied my husband and me to church. During the worship time, the Holy Spirit gave me a message for my neighbor's friend, who was a Christian. The Spirit showed me to tell her that she was to avoid the very appearance of evil in her relationship with her boyfriend, or her ministry would be hampered. I didn't know that this was a problem for her, but I delivered the message and didn't think much more about it. That afternoon, my neighbor called me and wanted to know "what in the world" I had said to her friend. I relayed the message, and she told me that her friend had been traveling with her boyfriend and sharing a hotel room. This confirmed what the Holy Spirit had given me to say.

I'm really going out on a limb here. I know that there are Christians on CF who believe that these spiritual gifts ceased with the apostles, and I'm not intending to derail this thread into a cessationist thread. I'm only pointing out the difference between gaining knowledge through gifts of the Holy Spirit vs. occult methods. Actually, I wasn't seeking knowledge about my neighbor's friend. The Holy Spirit moved on me and gave me this knowledge in order to warn this Christian sister that her ministry would be hampered.

Sorry this is so long. I hope that you'll read it all as I've been reading your posts.

Very well put P.W.
"It's interesting that Eve was tempted to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. She was tempted to gain knowledge that was not given to her by God. It was not given to man to know these things. Why did she desire to know about evil, anyway? This is what I see as the main objective of the occult--to know things that God has not shown to humans using methods that He has not given them to use. It's the devil's way, not God's." kind of ironic, in this particular situation...it's like building a tower God never approved.

 

[Giuliano]

um, imo that is a euphemism for a person wise in the world, with wings so to speak? Associated with owls, etc?
Isaiah 14:29 Lexicon: "Do not rejoice, O Philistia, all of you, Because the rod that struck you is broken; For from the serpent's root a viper will come out, And its fruit will be a flying serpent.

I was reading some book ( forget the title now) where the author said most religions mentioned flying serpents except Christianity and Judaism. I guess he hadn't read the Bible too carefully. You think it just a coincidence that so many religions talk about them? I say the serpent lost his wings in Eden. That is why he went down to "eat the dust." If the serpent gets its wings back, you get "healing" as in the cadeus -- but they put the wings at the top of the pole, not on the serpent. For some unknown reason, the Aztecs did not offer any sacrifices to their flying serpent god except flowers. All the others got human sacrifices.

hmm, dunno if that is a very compleat definition for that term wadr

Not complete, of course.

used to divine the future, right

People wanted me to divine the future. That was the big reason I gave them up. The card layout I used was meant to reveal patterns -- and probable outcome if no one changed course. So I wanted to tell them about the various possibilities. If I saw there was a problem that was likely to create a disastrous outcome, I wanted to talk to them about whether there was anything they could do about the situation. People didn't want to hear all that. They just wanted to know the outcome.

I was good if I must say so myself. I did not allow people to tell me their question. If they told me their question, odds were they'd be giving me information without even knowing it. Lots of time, I forgot what I said since it didn't interest me that much -- I also didn't want the ideas cluttering up my mind. Someone told me, when she met up with me, that I had predicted Nixon's resignation successfully. I said, "Did I?" She said yes. That was a bit of divining the future; but it wasn't undermining her free will. That's what I didn't like -- it was almost as if people wanted me to undermine their free will.

 

[4Jesus]

That seems like a stretch to me; but I doubt I could change your mind.

Or, what you're saying is the stretch

Matthew 24:14-15 "14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand"

Safe to assume the "gospel of the kingdom has been preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations", by now? If so, "then shall the end come".

Who is then discussed? The "abomination of desolation", who is to take action by standing in a holy place, when it's blasphemy to do so, meaning because the "abomination of desolation" is not Christ, he's antichrist.

Also, there's Daniel 9:27 "27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."

Who is the "he" spoken of in Daniel 9:27? It's single form; safe to assume the "he" is the "abomination of desolation".

 

[4Jesus]

Ah, so serpents can be a good thing if subject to the authority of God. . . .

When did I state that God cannot use evil for good? I'm not sure what you're point is, in that what you're stating isn't something I was arguing.

Are you arguing that Jesus is like a serpent? If so, I don't think there's similarity between how God views and uses serpents, and how satanists view and use serpents. God made them, and uses them - can be a tool like everything else. Satanists use them as a symbol, of rebellion and pride. Not even close to Jesus, agreed?

Jesus' death is a "use evil for good" thing...

 

[bbyrd009]

I was reading some book ( forget the title now) where the author said most religions mentioned flying serpents except Christianity and Judaism. I guess he hadn't read the Bible too carefully. You think it just a coincidence that so many religions talk about them? I say the serpent lost his wings in Eden. That is why he went down to "eat the dust." If the serpent gets its wings back, you get "healing" as in the cadeus -- but they put the wings at the top of the pole, not on the serpent. For some unknown reason, the Aztecs did not offer any sacrifices to their flying serpent god except flowers. All the others got human sacrifices.
Not complete, of course.

People wanted me to divine the future. That was the big reason I gave them up. The card layout I used was meant to reveal patterns -- and probable outcome if no one changed course. So I wanted to tell them about the various possibilities. If I saw there was a problem that was likely to create a disastrous outcome, I wanted to talk to them about whether there was anything they could do about the situation. People didn't want to hear all that. They just wanted to know the outcome.

I was good if I must say so myself. I did not allow people to tell me their question. If they told me their question, odds were they'd be giving me information without even knowing it. Lots of time, I forgot what I said since it didn't interest me that much -- I also didn't want the ideas cluttering up my mind. Someone told me, when she met up with me, that I had predicted Nixon's resignation successfully. I said, "Did I?" She said yes. That was a bit of divining the future; but it wasn't undermining her free will. That's what I didn't like -- it was almost as if people wanted me to undermine their free will.

you might like this guy, no divining, but reading of a sort,
Biblical Astrology, Billy Graham
i just pulled up the last one, billy g, for an example

 

[Giuliano]

And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

I take the underlined words to mean that Adam was with her when she ate the fruit.

You can take it that way, but it doesn't say so explicitly.

Naming Eve didn't give Adam the authority "to rule over her." In fact, God gave both Adam and Eve dominion over the earth.

Perhaps a study of how men of God can speak and make it so would be useful.

I've never completely understood the "desire" part, but this does sound like marriage. From what I've seen, it works both ways, though.

I'd say men are more apt to look at other women. There is another aspect to this too, the "desire of women." There the woman wants to have holy children, so she needs her husband to help do that. This role of women is what the Dark Side really detests as in Daniel 11.

I can take bluntness as long as it's not cruel. I believe that you've implied that using tarot cards is okay. (I'd have to track back.) I've never heard you say that using tarot cards is evil.... Why do you assume that they scare me?? They don't scare me because I know that greater is He who is in me than he who is in the world!

You wanted me to burn them.

The "oral" Torah? Much of the Torah was oral until it was written. Are you referring to the first 5 books of the Bible, or what?

No, not the material that got written down. The Oral Torah used to passed on only verbally from one person to a student when he was ready to hear it. Some is still not written down, like the meaning of the cherubim in Ezekiel. The Sanhedrin wanted to "hide" that book since it discussed things the Sanhedrin wanted to conceal; but it had been popular too fast with too many copies around that they couldn't get them all and hide them away. Maimonides said that. The Oral Torah contained mysteries then. Nicodemus knew most of them and wanted to see if Jesus did. It may seem impossible to believe, but Jesus was talking about the cherubim with Nicodemus. John is discrete and doesn't explain much.

I read portions of the Zohar in my research on mysticism. I also read many unbiblical things the so-called "Christian mystics" said.... And I compared all that I read to God's written word.

I asked you if you had gotten that info from the Zohar because it sounds like things the Zohar says. But you never answered my question about where you got the info. I would really like to know.

I've learned from many sources. I've learned from Buddhism which teaches many things similar to Christianity -- but with a different cultural angle. I've learned from Taoism and a little from Hinduism.

Show me in the Bible where God says that Adam and Eve were to "become as wise as a serpent"? In the Garden, they didn't need this kind of wisdom. They didn't need to avoid evil. God had told them all that they needed to know in order to do everything He created them to do.

That thought came from Jesus when he told his disciples to be as wise as a serpent and gentle as a dove.

If they didn't need to avoid evil, how did they succumb to it?

It is "debatable" if they were to eat of the tree later??? Really? You're twisting (LOL, auto correct changing this to "tweeting") God's words just like the devil did! And I believe that this all goes back to the desire for "hidden" knowledge--occult knowledge.

Nowhere in the Bible do we see your idea expressed--that Adam and Eve were to eat of the Tree at a later time! They wouldn't need the knowledge of good and evil unless they disobeyed God and ate of the Tree..., thus bringing evil into the world. Do you see what I'm saying?

It's in there three times.

Genesis 1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

Genesis 2:9 And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

2:16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Why would it be there if it was never to be eaten of? To me, it is an impure thought to think God put it there to tempt them -- God doesn't tempt anyone. My own conclusion -- and I don't present this as solid -- is that if Adam had cleaved to Eve, if the two had become one, then they could have eaten of it, not alone but together with the fruit of the Tree of Life. (That may be something from the Zohar, I'm not sure.)

Remember now "trees" are symbols for "man." Indeed Moses wrote that man is a tree of the field. (It's never translated that way however.) So I see the two trees having been divided just as Adam and Eve had been. The two trees were meant to united.

I'm not trying to demonize you. This is what doesn't make any sense to me at all. You're not willing to accept that the devil was acting through the serpent because the Bible doesn't say "the devil" tempted Eve. However, you've repeatedly ascribed ideas to the Bible that are not expressly stated in the Bible. I would say that you've expounded on His word quite a bit.

I hope you don't think I present my ideas as something I expect others to believe unless it makes sense to them. On the other hand, you seem quite certain it was the devil in Eden.

I agree with what you're saying here, and it's very sad to me. God gave these spiritual gifts for ministry, and I've seen how valuable they are when used properly. I've also seen the devil's counterfeits used, but like I said before, we shouldn't throw out the baby with the bath water.

BTW, did you read the verses from Ezekiel I posted?
.

I missed that, sorry. I see it portraying someone similar to the beast of the earth in Revelation. Again I found the Jewish commentary on that passage helpful since they preserved some historical details about that Prince of Tyre. Ezekiel says he was a man and would die like a man. Ezekiel is mocking him. "Oh, so you compare yourself to the covering cherub! Oh, you were in Eden!" The Prince of Tyre had built a temple dedicated to himself; and he knew some things about Eden, so he put things in that temple and painted the sun and moon and planets on the ceiling. His temple was built with dead stones, not lively ones of fire. He was a man just as the beast of the earth in Revelation is a man. He was spiritually insane in other words. I'd say he was used as a tool by Satan, but he wasn't Satan himself. The invasion of Tyre and his destruction happened as predicted. The man who wanted to be worshiped as a god or a godlike being was disposed of.

 

[Giuliano]

you might like this guy, no divining, but reading of a sort,
Biblical Astrology, Billy Graham
i just pulled up the last one, billy g, for an example

I like my own chart better. I would dread having Mars and the moon together like that so close to the top of the chart with both in opposition to Pluto.

I also don't agree with their take on the plow with Mercury showing being depicted as being in the house of Satanic attack. That configuration is usually known as a T-cross. It gives stamina and strength although there are problems to be worked out. When you see a T-cross like that, it shows what attributes need to be crucified. I agree that Graham failed to crucify some things at least in the most active years. Politics is part of it -- I agree with that part. His son is even more outrageous in mixing religion and politics. He was just in the news.

Correction: Religion-Trump Evangelicals story

He knew he had made some mistakes and said so before he died. He had spent too effort getting people to answer altar calls and not enough support for them afterwards.

 

[Giuliano]

When did I state that God cannot use evil for good? I'm not sure what you're point is, in that what you're stating isn't something I was arguing.

I asked you a question. I did not say you said anything.

Are you arguing that Jesus is like a serpent? If so, I don't think there's similarity between how God views and uses serpents, and how satanists view and use serpents. God made them, and uses them - can be a tool like everything else. Satanists use them as a symbol, of rebellion and pride. Not even close to Jesus, agreed?

I doubt Satanists and Christians would agree on anything. Of course, most Satanists are rather uninformed and playing with things they don't understand. I read "The Satanic Bible" and parts of it made me laugh, it was so silly. Maybe I shouldn't have laughed since silly people might take it seriously and drive themselves batty -- but oh well.

Jesus' death is a "use evil for good" thing...

I'd say so. I believe a righteous man can take what is meant for evil and convert it to good.

 

[Giuliano]

Or, what you're saying is the stretch

Matthew 24:14-15 "14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand"

Safe to assume the "gospel of the kingdom has been preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations", by now? If so, "then shall the end come".

Who is then discussed? The "abomination of desolation", who is to take action by standing in a holy place, when it's blasphemy to do so, meaning because the "abomination of desolation" is not Christ, he's antichrist.

Also, there's Daniel 9:27 "27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."

Who is the "he" spoken of in Daniel 9:27? It's single form; safe to assume the "he" is the "abomination of desolation".

I do not feel like going into so many other things since so many subjects are already on the table; but the Gospel was preached to every living creature.

Colossians 1:23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

 

[bbyrd009]

T
TTT

I also don't agree with their take on the plow with Mercury showing being depicted as being in the house of Satanic attack. That configuration is usually known as a T-cross

this guy often remarks that most interpretations are warped, and his are correct. yall all mostly speak from satans dialectic, him too, so who knows. i see even his as interesting after the fact anyway, and you might be dead on that his is off and this T thing is right. but he like doesnt use the normal pagan names for the planets, etc. im gonna ask him about the T, get back to you.

 

[Giuliano]

T
TTT

this guy often remarks that most interpretations are warped, and his are correct. yall all mostly speak from satans dialectic, him too, so who knows. i see even his as interesting after the fact anyway, and you might be dead on that his is off and this T thing is right. but he like doesnt use the normal pagan names for the planets, etc. im gonna ask him about the T, get back to you.

You might also ask him about what is called the Grand Cross. More difficult but could be even better.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

No, not the material that got written down. The Oral Torah used to passed on only verbally from one person to a student when he was ready to hear it. Some is still not written down, like the meaning of the cherubim in Ezekiel. The Sanhedrin wanted to "hide" that book since it discussed things the Sanhedrin wanted to conceal; but it had been popular too fast with too many copies around that they couldn't get them all and hide them away. Maimonides said that. The Oral Torah contained mysteries then. Nicodemus knew most of them and wanted to see if Jesus did. It may seem impossible to believe, but Jesus was talking about the cherubim with Nicodemus. John is discrete and doesn't explain much.

What is your source for this info on the "Oral Torah"?

I've learned from many sources. I've learned from Buddhism which teaches many things similar to Christianity -- but with a different cultural angle. I've learned from Taoism and a little from Hinduism.

I can see this very clearly in your pantheistic beliefs.

That thought came from Jesus when he told his disciples to be as wise as a serpent and gentle as a dove.

If they didn't need to avoid evil, how did they succumb to it?

So, you just applied what Jesus said to his disciples to Adam and Eve concerning the Tree that God told Adam and Eve not to eat from?? Hmm.

I said they didn't need to know about evil. They succumbed to the temptation to disobey God. Sin entered God's material creation through Adam's disobedience, bringing death.

Romans 5:12--"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"

2:16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

In case you hadn't noticed, this is one statement, not two. It's actually written as one sentence. You can't separate the two parts to this one command.

Even I understand what God is saying here. They could eat freely from every tree except that one tree. If you and I were going somewhere, and I wanted to bring some bags of food that I had prepared, I might say, "Take every bag except that one." You would know that I never meant for you to take that one bag even though I said "take every bag."

I hope you don't think I present my ideas as something I expect others to believe unless it makes sense to them. On the other hand, you seem quite certain it was the devil in Eden.

If either of us says anything that is not true, I hope that no one believes those things. Yeah, I and millions of other Christians throughout history have understood that the serpent in the Garden represents the devil. Not to say that millions of Christians can't be wrong, but this is a very widely accepted belief.

I missed that, sorry. I see it portraying someone similar to the beast of the earth in Revelation. Again I found the Jewish commentary on that passage helpful since they preserved some historical details about that Prince of Tyre. Ezekiel says he was a man and would die like a man. Ezekiel is mocking him. "Oh, so you compare yourself to the covering cherub! Oh, you were in Eden!" The Prince of Tyre had built a temple dedicated to himself; and he knew some things about Eden, so he put things in that temple and painted the sun and moon and planets on the ceiling. His temple was built with dead stones, not lively ones of fire. He was a man just as the beast of the earth in Revelation is a man. He was spiritually insane in other words. I'd say he was used as a tool by Satan, but he wasn't Satan himself. The invasion of Tyre and his destruction happened as predicted. The man who wanted to be worshiped as a god or a godlike being was disposed of.

Well, at least you're telling me where you got the interpretation of these verses. I appreciate this since I've been asking you where you're getting your ideas.

But I have to laugh at this narrow interpretation of verses that sound so much like they're describing Satan. Could have dual meanings, but so much of this clearly applies to Satan. I'm sure that some Christian commentaries would bear this out, but I haven't read any on these passages to tell you one way or another. I don't tend to consult commentaries even though I think they can be useful at times.
.

 

[4Jesus]

I asked you a question. I did not say you said anything.

I'm sorry, my mixup; thought you were stating a point rather than asking a question.

I doubt Satanists and Christians would agree on anything. Of course, most Satanists are rather uninformed and playing with things they don't understand. I read "The Satanic Bible" and parts of it made me laugh, it was so silly. Maybe I shouldn't have laughed since silly people might take it seriously and drive themselves batty -- but oh well.

Well, we all exist I guess, so that's one way we agree- if that could be called an agreement. lol

I'd say so. I believe a righteous man can take what is meant for evil and convert it to good.

Even moreso, God can and does, all the time. The Bible is littered with this. Even satan's rebellion is used for good by Him. That's one reason of why we bow to Him